Let it be Lowenstein

ESPN's Trey Wingo is great in his 5 minute skits. Plus, he was always hilarious when he used to do the late night Sportscenter when it was 2 AM and you had just gotten back from the bar. I remembering him randomly stealing Stu Scott's boo-ya one night just because it was funny.

Buster Olney has truly emerged as the best cover guy for baseball. That is simply my opinion.

If Jim Ed does not make it this time--I will honestly be DEVASTATED, he is SO deserving of it, and any of you seamhead stat-dorks out there want to say otherwise, so back to playing your XBOX 360 or figuring out AROD's adjusted OPS if he played for the 1987 Hanshin Tigers. The guy didn't lead the league in the categories he did, or finish as high in the MVP balloting as often as he did on rep alone, fools. And I TOTALLY agree with you on Trammell, Chad, I was disgusted when he and Sweet Lou got so little love from the voters, pathetic, really. And in addition Chad, wouldn't itbe better to call him "EX Mets GM Knucklehead Steve Phillips, since he single-handedly botched AROD going to the Mets?

That fifth ESPN personality is a shared spot between Rachel Nichols and Erin Andrews. Or maybe Jaws...

No, you're not Corky. But you are a bit of a $%#%% for using a retarded kid as the punchline for one of your terrific "witticisims." Very classy.

re: 5 players over Starbury #3: I don't want the guy on my team either, but I gotta draw the line at a pregnant woman! (unless she can be back for the finals)

You know there's a 4th team in Boston, too. I think you should mention them in your column, if you really want to touch ALL the bases...

Re ESPN personalities, how about (ex) personality, Sean Salisbury. It seemed like he was the only one who stuck for the Pats during spygate.

5 worst injuries in Boston sports the last 20 year's.

1- Neely's Knee/Thigh
2-Brady's Knee
3-Nomar's wrist
4- Bird's back
5-Lowell's hip (with a healthy Mike Lowell they beat TB and win the WS)

Five random people who I'd prefer wrote this column over Chad Finn...

5: Scooby-doo
4: O.J.
3: Winnie the Pooh
2: Jessica Simpson
1: John Lowenstein (Yes, the guy from the above card.)

You are such a lousy writer. I can't believe the Globe posts your garbage. Do you actually make money for this?

At least shank has an interesting topic from time to time. Your stuff is filler at best. Time for a new job.

Good point about the Bruins, Alex. The reason I don't write about them -- for now -- is because I'm a bandwagon jumper with this team, and for now, I certainly have no more insight than the majority of fans, and I don't want to pretend I do. (Doesn't stop me with the Sox and Pats, though, right?) I actually was going to write a light column along those lines, but Mazz beat me to it (and did it really, really well) with his piece asking questions to Fluto and Kevin Paul Dupont.

John, the Corky reference was about Corky Simpson, the writer who admitted he didn't vote for Rickey. I added a link to clear that up.

And Jaws has been added as a fifth ESPN personality.

i know there are a lot of these, but how about adding Jarod Mayo to the Belichick-is-smarter-than-you-are list.

everyone said the Pats reached at 10. one of the most sound linebackers I can remember coming out of college. especially in this system. I mean the guy played nearly every freakin down this season....as a rookie...at middle linebacker...in BB's 3-4 scheme. ROY. unreal. especially with such a heavy need at the position, with the average age at 63 years old.

oh, throw logan mankins in there as well. no one though much of him on draft day. a beast.

this list should probably be a top 10 or top 20.

oh, and as to your pickup-instead-of-Marbury list.....Candace Parker is pregnant. But I'm assuming you'd STILL rather have her on the C's than Marbury.

Chad,
Best post ever, especially the Steve Phillips references. This is what a blog should be: you throw it out there with significant craft, and we all bloviate against it. It's clear to see now why the Mets have been digging out of their hole for so long. As for ESPN, the no-show at #5 is brilliant as it clearly shows how many shmoes are raking in the fairly big bucks for not much performance. If push comes to shove, at least give a nod to Andy North on golf, who at least has 2 US Open titles behind him. The guy knows what he's talking about and never appears to be reading the cue cards.

Why does everyone gush over Jaws as an analyst? He has a miopic perspective of expertise (QB/Receivers/Tight ends/coverage) that lacks any expertise of line play, blocking, kicking or special teams. He literally never comments on them and instead diddles himself exultedly when a quarterback makes a minor read correctly. Line play, blocking, running, tackling and special teams are seventy five percent of the game of football. So please stop praising him as a scholar of the game because he's not. He's just another ESPN former loud mouth player windbag, and worse, he's one who is so smug that he voices every sentence in some sing-song, lilting rhythm that not only sounds rehearsed but is really over the top when it's overused... like it's some sort of deep clinching thought... "and THAT'S why PEYTON MANNING... is a hall of fame..... Quarterback."...

I'm told Candace Parker and her husband are indeed welcoming a baby into their lives, but that Glen Davis is actually the child's surrogate mother - which may account for why he likely will be progressively showing more and more as the season goes on. Congrats to all involved!

Chad, I'm your age and haven't followed the Bruins for years. What are the basics I might need to know to be a true bandwagon fan? I'd totally appreciate it if you'd be so kind as to whip up a little primer for those who know nothing about the B's post-Stan Jonathan and are proud to cheer on the organ-eye-zation as long as it's all over by the time Smoltz gets healthy and joins the line-up. Thanks.

After years of reading your blog, I continue to find it highly entertaining. I look forward to reading it as I grow fatter, balder and less able to remember the names of Sox utilities guys from the early 80's. Happy New Year to you and yours.

How about another draft day debacle, I would take any one of these that were drafted AFTER Laura Maroney:

DeAngelo Williams
LenDale White
Greg Jennings
Devin Hester
Maurice Jones-Drew
Owen Daniels

dear mr finn,
if you think jim rice is unworthy of being voted into the hall of fame........

then you're too young to remember.

Type your comment here...
Touviao or whatever your name is...you have no taste...Chad is a breath of fresh air...the best. if you don't like him get the hell off and go read Borges.

Hey Petty...whatayknow your name fits your comment. Before you insult Finn re. his Corky reference...you might want to check out the link right next to it!!!!! Sheesh!!

A few riffs of my own here.
I don't think Rice quite has the numbers to get into the Hall, and I LOVED Jim Rice when I was growing up. In fact, he was my favorite player. Played hard. Played hurt. Played every day. Kept his mouth shut. And on top of that, his "non-clutch" reputation was not a deserved one--because of Bucky Dent, nobody remembers that Rice actually singled in the Sox' 2nd run off Guidry in the 6th inning of the '78 playoff, and because of Yaz's popup to Nettles, nobody remembers that Rice JUST MISSED driving a Gossage fastball into the Sox bullpen in the 9th for the game winning 3-run homer. Piniella caught the ball about 10 feet in front of
the fence. I swear to this day that Rice missed hitting it into the bleachers by about 1/16th of an inch.

In 1986, because of Dave Henderson in Game 5, nobody remembers that Rice actually struck the big blow in Game 7 of the ALCS--a game-busting 3-run homer over everything in left off John Candelaria. In the World Series, he hit .300 but didn't drive in any runs because Buckner was stranding everyone on base in front of Rice and forcing the Sox cleanup hitter to bat leadoff in about half of his at bats during the series. All that said, Rice's career collapsed a couple of years too early. If he'd still been a .300-25-90 guy in 1987 and 1988, he would have cruised into the Hall long ago. But right now, his numbers are a bit borderline, and I just don't think they're quite "there" for the Hall of Fame.

Regarding the Pats: they need to trade Cassel, even if Brady is not ready to go on Day 1 next season (I doubt very much that he'd miss the whole season--maybe just a PUP portion of six weeks), because they need the extra draft picks to fix the defense, and really, after the success of Brady and Cassel under Belichick, does anyone doubt that Kevin O'Connell will be good enough to keep the team's head above water next season just long enough until Brady is ready to go? I know I don't doubt it. With one of those extra picks, the Pats need to trade for Tony Gonzalez, who probably would welcome a shot to escape the KC Gulag and have a last chance at winning a championship in his twilight years. Sure, he ain't what he used to be, but he's still a very productive TE and I really can't stomach another high draft pick being blown on a disappointing tight end here, not after watching Graham, Watson, Thomas and Garrett Mills (remember him?--same draft as Thomas) flame out.

Chad, very spot on about Girardi vs. Torre. That's being overlooked in all of the hysteria over the Yankees signings this offseason. Torre knew how to handle a clubhouse full of big egos and big contracts; I'm not sure Girardi does, but we'll see. Also, why would the Yankee outfield include Cabrera over Matsui? Is he going to just DH this year now that "the mustache" has taken his thong and his traveling pharmacy back to Oakland?

As for the C's, call me crazy, but "back in the day," Red would bring in a guy like Marbury against everyone else's advice, and the guy would become a pussycat while helping the team win another title. I know this isn't 1968 or 1984, but I don't know--something tells me that Garnett, Pierce and Allen wouldn't let "Starbury" get out of line here. I agree with you on Joe Smith however. He'd be a great pickup.

I never really "left" the Bruins, but I did stop giving C. Montgomery Jacobs my money for game tickets at least 6 years ago, except on rare occasions when I was treating my nephew to a game or something like that. I mainly just watched them on TV and followed them in the paper the last several years. But at the end of last season, like a lot of people, I started to take more notice of them, and this year, I have to say that I'm sold. Chiarelli seems to know what he's doing and Jacobs has actually been a bit looser with the purse strings the last few years (granted, within the confines of the salary cap, which was always his big goal for the NHL anyway). I'm cautiously optimistic.

And Chad, I agree with you 1000% about Alan Trammell. Not only should he be in the Hall of Fame, but for my money, one of the biggest travesties in baseball history was slugger/karate master Jorge Bell of the choking Blue Jays being awarded the 1987 AL MVP over Trammell, who carried a so-so Detroit offense on his back all year and helped Detroit surge past Toronto in the last week of the season, while Bell was striking out more than Mark Bellhorn in 2005 (OK, maybe not that bad).

Big fan of Scott Van Pelt. He seems eminently likeable and down to Earth. His radio show is decent as well, and he doesn't seem to take himself too seriously.

I also second your Keith Law nomination. He's arrogant but also backs it up with fact and passionately destroys every old-time cliche baseball argument possible.

Finn, You keep attracting a good number of trolls, who despite thinking you're a dork and/or YANKEES RULE 4-EVA!, keep coming back to read your every word. I wish they'd go back to Simmons' junk, where they belong. As for ESPN, I also like Linda Cohn and Cindy Brunson (who is amazingly married to Steve Berthiaume, go figure).

I can't STAND Linda Cohn....but it's not a woman thing. I still maintain the best presenter ever on ESPN was the venerable Robin Roberts. Here's wishing her good luck in her battle against cancer. Get Well RR.

thanks to you now chadders i will have lou rawls' smooth voice going in my head all day - and it may drive me to actually taste a lowenbrau...if they even still make it!

Rice should be in the hall. OPS+? Check Ricky Henderson's then compare to Rice. Are we arguing that Henderson wasn't a good hitter now?

Chad, like the column. But please, never, ever mention "Keith Law" and "don't loathe" in the same paragraph ever again. I'm not sure how a stat-crunching sportswriter can have an ego larger than Manny, but he somehow found a way.

You cannot trade Cassel without knowing the condition of Brady. We don't know how those draft choices will turn out. We seem to know much more about Cassel. I sure feel a lot more confident with him at the helm, then O' Connell.

I can't believe someone just tried to compare Rickey Henderson to Jim Rice. Picking one stat (OPS+) and saying that Rice and Henderson are similar is telling perhaps 5-percent of the story. They were completely different players, in spite of the fact that they were both leftfielders. Why not look at OBP instead? Rice OBP-ed an unremarkable .352 compared to Rickey's outstanding .401. Rickey averaged 115 walks a season, while Rice averaged 52(!). Rickey was deadly on the basepaths, while Rice was deadly in a wholly different way, i.e GIDPs. How many Major League offensive records does Rice hold? Rickey holds at least four that I can think of, and he also had over 3000 hits.

In the final analysis, the case against Rice is a little stronger than the case for.

Pro:
He was everyone's favorite player as a kid.
He had a really strong 8 year offensive period.
Dan Shaughnessy thinks he was the most frightening player in the world.
It sounds really cool to call him "Jim Ed."

Con: His career was just too short.
His home numbers were disproportionately superior to his road numbers.
He never reached any of the milestone numbers that make these discussions irrelevant. No 500 homers. No .300+ batting average. No 1500 RBIs. No 10 All-Star games. No WS titles (I realize this is unfair, but it is one of the things that gets you consideration).

Frankly, 382 homers for a guy who was essentially a pure offensive player is just not that impressive. When your career numbers aren't that great AND you still played three years longer than you should have, your chances of HOF induction are probably going to come down to being someone's "sentimental" pick. Chad admitted as much, and I don't think it's because he "doesn't remember" what Rice was like.

Now, if Jim Rice gets voted in this year, will he be the worst player in the Hall? Not even remotely. Phil Rizzuto is already in. So are Bruce Sutter and Tony Perez. Rice was better than any of those guys. If Rice doesn't get in, however, it will hardly be a miscarriage of justice. Put another way, if Jim Rice had put up these career numbers for the Montreal Expos, you Sox fans would find this argument just as ridiculous as everyone else does.

Jim Ed belongs, because the pitching was far superior back then and he played pre-expansion, before TB, Colorado, and Colorado. Also, he played in a pre steroid era.

I don't care for Tim Kurkjian on ESPN. He's a Barry Bonds/Roger Clemens apologist, who seems to have no sense of humor.

How can you not love Krukkie. Even his wife says he's "not as disgusting as he used to be".

great post only one issue

tasteless move listing Marquise Hill as a mistake in the draft.... maybe he was but the guy is dead.... show a little respect

just could have done without him being included

So, did you try the reverse jinx for Jim Rice?????

Marquise Hill was a tragedy to be sure, but he was also a colossal bust as a football player. Sorry, no apologies.

Yes, that was the reverse jinx for Rice. Or that's the story I'm going with.

Chad,
Gotta go with the woman doctor on ESPN as number 5...or Barry Melrose.

Top 5 Movies I never turn off when I run acros them on cable, regardless of what point in the movie it is, or how late at night/early in AM it's on:
1. Goodfellas
2. Animal House
3. Tombstone
4. Ferris Beuller's Day Off
5. Scarface